Why so much hype?

Strong and Moving!

Crappy film

When a movie has you begging for it to end not even half way through it's pure crap. We've all seen this movie and this characters millions of times, nothing new in it. Don't waste your time.

I admit that reviewing this movie based solely on the short version that I saw on "Mystery Science Theater 3000" isn't being fair. The full version is over two hours long while this version was only 80 minutes long. I guess it makes sense to give a score of 5, right in the middle. It truly was interesting to see such a lesser known film that won an Oscar. It just didn't come off as that good to me. It's at least nice to see such talented actors like Gregory Peck and Gene Hackman. They're just okay.I guess everything is done in a pretty realistic way. In 2013, we saw an infinitely better Oscar winning movie about being stuck in space, "Gravity". This just had too many scenes of just talking and the atmosphere wasn't that interesting. Well, maybe it just hasn't aged well. I admit it was kind of lame when everyone survived at the end. Still, it's a lot better than most films of its kind. It just seemed mediocre to me, so I wouldn't recommend it. **

I don't think the criticisms about this movie are justified if you measure it against other movies of that period. Not '2001' by any standard and not a syfy movie either. As far as I recall they stay pretty much in bounds to the technology involved at the time. I can't remember when I first saw this movie. I didn't remember any part of it until the scene where gene hackman says "I broke the washing machine". If you grew up during this period or you just like movies and TV shows from this period, then this is pretty good representation of the period. The production quality and technical details are pretty good for the time. This is no 'b' movie. Consider: released about 6 months after 1st moon landing and about 4 months before apollo 13. Released right at the peak of social discontent in the US. As far as I recall, most consider poseidon adventure as the movie that kicked off the 'disaster' movie genre. Like airport, towering inferno, earthquake, and so on. This came out two years before but same type storytelling but not the box office hit. I particularly like hackman's portrayal of the astronaut gone 'buggy' and the way they all get drama queened at the end. Of course this was long before we viewed astronauts as steely eyed misslemen and during a period where the public was beginning to lose interest in the space program because it was considered too blaise.

The best thing about Marooned is Lee Grant. She's really wonderful in a tiny role as the wife of the commander.The worst thing about Marooned is that it's dated. Here's a sample line of dialogue that made me cringe: "Celia and I have been in this business 10 years. We learned that the best thing is for us girls to keep our feelings to ourselves and let the men get on with their jobs. Right, Celia?"This is a dramatic story about three astronauts stranded in orbit. Richard Crenna, the spacecraft commander, and James Franciscus, the science systems astronaut, are very good. I especially liked Franciscus. Unfortunately, Gregory Peck is kind of stiff and stoic as the man in charge. Gene Hackman is the Apollo guidance pilot and as he gradually goes crazy, I'm not sure if I didn't like his acting or I didn't like his character. Anyway, I did not enjoy watching him.The makers of this movie went to great lengths to be very accurate in their depiction of mission control, the Apollo capsule, costuming and such. Great production values all around. The storm looks really authentic too. It won an Oscar for best visual effects in 1970.David Janssen plays an Air Force colonel who wants to launch a rescue mission against all odds. He's the heroic senior astronaut on the ground who wants to fly the X-RV into space to save them. It's never before been flown into space so there are some inherent dangers. When it's finally launched, it's actually a pretty thrilling sight. It's a very quiet movie and the pacing is kind of slow. It's not bad, but overall, the movie had too much technology and perhaps too much realism - it needed a bit more storytelling and drama.

This was released in 1969. So, it was the era when voyages to the moon were just beginning, and it was long before the time of the International Space Station. So it was an era when there was interest in space flight and its future. "Marooned" surely did a good job of capturing public interest in its subject matter. And it captured a sense of the future, with its multi-month mission being a bit like ISS missions. So, in 1969, this probably was seen as a pretty dramatic film. Alas, it's now 2014. I wouldn't so much say that it feels dated. Rather, it feels unnecessary.The drama of the movie is the likelihood of the crew being lost when a malfunction makes it impossible for them to get home. The astronauts are played by James Franciscus, Gene Hackman and Richard Crenna. Their performances were fine - especially Hackman's, as his Buzz Lloyd starts to come unglued. Still, in some ways everything seemed a bit too professional, as for the most part everyone does their duty and makes the decisions that need to be made. That might be a very realistic portrayal of how the situation would be handled, but it didn't make for spellbinding viewing.Watching this in 2014 though, my biggest feeling was that I didn't need to watch it. I mean, if you want a movie about stranded astronauts, watch "Apollo 13" - which, in addition to being a superb movie has the advantage of being based on a true story. "Marooned" isn't bad. In 1969 it was probably very good. It just isn't necessary viewing when compared to what's available today. (6/10)